Radical Recentering

Abstract

Background: The widely adopted Interstate School Leaders Licensure Consortium standards are designed to guide the preparation and professional development of educational leaders. However, the standards’ limited mention of race, class, ethnicity, ability, gender, sexuality, or other marginalized identities suggests that addressing persistent inequities need not be a central concern of preparation programs and leaders in P-12 schools. Purpose and Proposed Model: In this article, we put forth a new set of standards with equity at the core. We seek to advance the conversation about why standards centered on equity are needed—particularly in light of a proposed standards refresh—and what implications would follow from equity-focused standards. To this end, we offer 10 high-leverage equitable leadership practices, identified through research and the extant literature as those most likely to mitigate disparities for students who have not been well served due to their race, class, ethnicity, home language, and/or ability. We discuss how a set of equity-focused leadership standards would facilitate radical changes in leadership preparation programs, professional development, and evaluation. Implications: We aim for this work to augment the conversation around leadership standards and compel action to bring equity to the center.

Doing Family Differently in School-to-Home Contexts: Gay Fathers at the Schoolhouse Door

“…Despite limitations and areas for future research, the findings from this study have significant practical implications for educational leadership preparation programs. One way is through a socially just curriculum that equips leaders with a critical consciousness about multiple systems of oppression and marginalization (Galloway & Ishimaru, 2015) and helps future leaders develop positive dispositions toward diversity and equity (Allen et al, 2017;Koschoreck et al, 2012). Operationalizing such a curriculum in leadership programs should include the works of queer theorists, feminist scholars, and intersectional theorists where students explore underrepresented content related to gender, gender identity, sexual orientation, and their intersections of race, ethnicity and class.…”

A Call for Rethinking Schooling and Leadership in the Time of COVID-19

“…Culturally responsive leadership which calls for the liberation of marginalized communities from the oppressive systems and actors, and a validation for cultural history, values and knowledge provides another entry point to this work (Khalifa et al, 2016). Galloway and Ishimaru (2015) propose 10 high leverage leadership practices that help school leaders address issues of ethnic, racial, and economic disparities in our schools. These practices also focus leadership preparation programs on questions of equity across all facets of schooling, including the context of the school community, teaching and learning, resource allocation, and leadership practices.…”

Leadership Preparation for Social Justice in Educational Administration

“…(Anderson et al, 2017) However, even in spite of concerted efforts to improve curricula and ensure that future school leaders are prepared through rigorous activities and assessments, the schools into which they enter remain inequitable places for many students, particularly those from racially and linguistically diverse backgrounds, those who live in poverty, those who have disabilities, and those whose gender and sexual identities fall outside of the mainstream. Furthermore, neither the standards themselves (Galloway & Ishimaru, 2015) nor many programs (Capper, Theoharis, & Sebastian, 2006;Furman, 2012;Gooden & Dantley, 2012;McKenzie et al, 2008) explicitly attend to issues of equity in a thorough way.…”

“…Until very recently, the curricula of many leadership preparation programs have been guided by standards developed by the Interstate School Leaders Licensure Consortium (ISLLC), called the Standards for School Leaders, that focus broadly on visionary leadership, instructional improvement, effective management, inclusive practice, ethical leadership, and sociopolitical leadership (Galloway & Ishimaru, 2015). The Consortium was made up of states and other key stakeholders interested in American school leadership; its twofold goal was to create standards to reshape school administration and to point attention to the academic, policy, and practice domains related to in light of this move (Murphy, 2005).…”

“…The ISLLC standards were designed to support the preparation and professional development of educational leaders, yet they were not universally embraced. Further, the standards did not explicitly address issues of race, class, ethnicity, ability, gender, sexuality, or other marginalized identities (Galloway & Ishimaru, 2015) and the assessment of whether students were able to meet the standards did not give individuals the opportunity to demonstrate a commitment to social justice (Cambron-McCabe & McCarthy, 2005).…”